Sub menu

Tait Takes Credit Where It Isn’t Due

There’s been considerable point-counterpoint in Anaheim over the Tom Tait/Lorri Galloway Mayoral flap over the past couple of days and many of the Tait-bots complaining that Galloway has “turned on a man of integrity” Jason Young, that Tait supports traditional Democratic issues (Greg Diamond), or that Galloway is too stupid to be Mayor (Cynthia Ward: “And if Galloway was so dumb as a rock that she didn’t know any better, or failed to find out if she was unfamiliar with the show, what makes her think she is smart enough to run this City?), or comments on her decorating from someone who never set foot in her Colony home during her BoS run(Dave Zenger, “I seem to remember this was shot in her second fake new home. Just check out the thrift store furniture. Even a bad house stager would be embarrassed). Note to Dave, it wasn’t cheap furniture and the home wasn’t fake, but you certainly are).

There have been the usual strings of attacks on Galloway: what did she really do during her time on the council? I can keep bringing up her work on affordable housing that helps working class families in Anaheim. She helped create the Anaheim Family Justice Center to help curb domestic violence, served on the OCTA and has received numerous awards for public service

I keep hearing the word “integrity” associated with Tom Tait. So if an elected conservative Republican mayor takes credit for something they actually voted against, is that a mark of integrity?

Tait is quoted by the OC Register’s Frank Mickadeit, in a response column to Galloway’s announcement, saying he led on the issue of city budget cuts.

““When I took office, the city was losing $56,000 a day and had been for two years. If I didn’t do anything, we would have run out of money. We had eaten through $30 million in reserves. We had to make immediate cuts. A lot of people didn’t like that but it had to be done.”

“If ‘I’ didn’t do anything” is the key phrase here. As it turned out, Tait didn’t do anything.

When the Anaheim City Council voted on deficit reduction, Tait was the lone vote against moves by the council to cut the deficit in half. Galloway voted with the Council majority to cut employee pay by 5 percent. Tait voted no because the city staff was getting a 10 percent reduction in their schedules and Tait suggested that it amounted to an hourly increase even though workers were making less. The vote was not so much about the 5 percent but about restoring it after an 18 month period.

From the minutes of the March 2011 meeting:

RESOLUTION NO 2011 030 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving a Letter of Understanding between the D1154 Anaheim Municipal Employees Association General and Clerical Units and the City of Anaheim Council Meeting Minutes of March 22 2011.

Approve and authorize the Human Resources Director to temporarily suspend applicable personnel rules and pay policies in order to reduce the base compensation of all unrepresented employees including all management safety and non safety along with confidential employees. Human Resources Director Kristine Ridge explained Item No 19 reflected a unique concession agreement reached with one of the City largest full time unions AMEA, which would provide temporary fiscal relief and included a five percent reduction in take home pay of all AMEA fulltime employees except dispatch personnel and a corresponding reduction in all employer paid percentage based benefits such as required pension contributions matching retired health savings contributions and other items such as bilingual pay In addition to this concession there would be a modification of the overtime policy to meet the minimum FLSA standards reducing the number of hours eligible for time and a half compensation and the establishment of a 36 hour work week Council action would also consider approval of a temporary suspension of applicable personnel rules and pay policies to provide for a five percent reduction in pay for all City fulltime unrepresented employees including safety and non safety management employees and confidential employees. She added approval of this item would be for a 12 month period and was expected to generate citywide savings in personnel costs of 59million with 31 million of those savings attributed directly to the General Fund.

Mayor Tait asked for clarification on the36 hour work week with Ms. Ridge responding it was modified to not include a City Hall closure but the work week was designated 36 hours and combined for a two week period would be 72 hours.

Mayor Pro Tem Sidhu inquired if there would be impacts to service levels with Ms. Ridge replying there would be a slight impact to service levels because of the reduction in work hours however each of the operation departments had been tasked with identifying mitigating measures to lessen any impact such as relying more on salaried employees having greater reliance on technology and additional scheduling of part-time personnel. The City would retain the same operating hours for all public counters and similar operations. This program she explained offered temporary fiscal relief and would be effective until July 5 2012. Mayor Pro Tern Sidhu asked how many employees would be affected by this concession Ms Ridge replied 590 AMEA employees and 540 unrepresented employees extended to management and unclassified employees as well.

Mayor Tait requested clarification regarding proposed savings related to this agreement. After some discussion Ms Ridge explained that for every hourly employee there would be an effective increased rate change however at the end of the day all hourly employees would be taking home five percent less in base wages. Mayor Tait responded his concern was that for a two week period an employee would work for 9 days and be paid for9-1/2days and he would not be able to support this unless it was a one for one exchange. He expressed appreciation for AMEA negotiating in good faith and wished he could have been part of the decision making process earlier on however he would not be able to support a concession that provided an hourly rate increase.

Council Member Murray remarked she had given this proposal a great deal of consideration and also would have liked to have been part of the team coming up with the terms of this negotiation However she stated with the City facing at 10 to 12 million shortfall this option would reduce salaries across the board by five percent and provide significant interim relief that would eliminate additional layoffs and cuts to vital City services to residents and businesses She added Anaheim was now at its lowest employee head count in 20 years while population and service needs had expanded and while prior councils had taken fiscal measures which kept Anaheim out of dire fiscal straits there were still tough choices to be made to get reserves back She felt this was a significant concession at this junction and would support the agreement.

Council Member Eastman concurred stating this action would enable the City to control overtime and pension costs and she would be in support of the agreement as well.

Council Member Galloway appreciated AMEA’s willingness to work with staff and make a sacrifice which would help cut the City’s general fund liabilities at a time when it was needed and she would support this effort.

Staff answered questions on the negotiation process ongoing drain of reserve funds and potential layoffs impacting City services City Manager Tom Wood stated the action before Council would lessen the impact of reduced services In previous workshops staff clearly laid out financial considerations and a 10 to 12 million structural deficit which was burning reserves at 03080 a day This concession he remarked would reduce the reductions needed by about one-third and while staff was attempting to minimize the impact on services there would ultimately be no way to reduce operations by that amount without having some impact on services.

Mayor Pro Tem Sidhu remarked he would personally like to see structural changes to come up with solutions to stop raiding reserves and while not fully satisfied with this concession he was willing to support it He then moved to approve RESOLUTION NO 2011 030 OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving a Letter of Understanding between the Anaheim Municipal Employees Association General and Clerical Units and the City of Anaheim seconded by Council Member Eastman. Roll Call Vote Ayes: 4 Council Members Eastman Galloway Murray and Sidhu. Noes: 1 Mayor Tait. Motion Carried.

The only thing Tait did do was force staff to contract out Anaheim’s Parks Maintenance workers and replace them with a Private Contractor after employees agreed to take the cut in pay. Wow, how does that move to privatize a public employee union staffed city service align with values of the Democratic Party as the Bald Barrister claims? Tait threw about 30 people under the bus to make a minor dent in the city’s finances to help balance the books.

And because of “Saint Tait’s integrity,” Mickadeit just quoted him and broke the rule posted all over the Register’s newsroom” “If you mother says she loves you, check it out.” Had Mickadeit “checked it out” Tait’s lie would be exposed.

It was Lorri Galloway who brokered the compromise with the Republican council majority and the unions to save the city millions of dollars with minimal cuts in service and without layoffs. She deserves credit for cutting the deficit in half. Tait had nothing to do with it. Case and point how Lorri can govern by working with her colleagues – for those who claim it would be no different if she were mayor.

14 comments for “Tait Takes Credit Where It Isn’t Due”

For the record, I want to point out to our readers, that TheLiberalOC is a technically liberal, and pro-democrat blog. Dan and I differ on a variety of policy issues. While Mayor Tait’s libertarian philosophy has placed him in the same camp with many liberals in the area of government subsidies for developers in Anaheim, he is still a very conservative elected official. I am compelled to point out that his attack on public employee pensions is one of the most anti-liberal, and in-fact anti-worker, positions that an elected official can take.

Both Tait, (a Republican) and Santa Ana Mayor Pulido (a Democrat) have signed on to an initiative designed to destroy public employee benefits and burden future generations with unfunded social safety-net costs necessary to cover the erosion of pension benefits they advocate. Both individuals should and will be criticized on this blog for their positions on this issue.

As far as the Tait/Galloway fight for the Mayor’s pulpit in Anaheim is concerned, it should be no surprise that this publication, and/or it’s writers, will support a Democrat over a Republican 99 percent of the time. I also note however, that Democrats need to count higher than one, or two, to have any real power in Anaheim.

Dan Chmielewski

November 12, 2013 at 10:42 am

Well said Chris; I’m sure readers would love to be a fly on the wall when we scream at each other, but the fact of the matter is I think readers know we don’t always see eye to eye.

Also, no matter what some may assume, my positions on issues stated on this blog are mine, and do not necessarily represent the views of any organization I am affiliated with. This is a bit of a conundrum for me when it comes to blogging. in certain instances, some folks have a problem with understanding that while I wear many hats, no one hat implies the design of the other.

Greg Diamond

November 13, 2013 at 4:19 am

While I haven’t studied those particular issues, I expect that I would disagree with Tait’s position on them. I’ve written elsewhere that I agree with Galloway more across the board than I do Tait. However, on the issues that are front and center in Anaheim right now, not only do I think that Tait’s positions are well in tune with Democratic values, but apparently so do the majority of rank-and-file Democrats in the area. (How do I know this? From talking to party officials in the area.)

Speaking of how one knows things, the research done for this piece is very atypical of Dan’s work in terms of the amount of research put in (and especially in terms of the amount of relevant knowledge that it demonstrates of Anaheim politics and policy, about which Dan generally appears to know little.) So, I’m just curious as to who did the research and fed Dan the story. I don’t expect him to say so, but it’s interesting to wonder why not.

Chris, believe me: I have no desire to be a fly at all, but if I was unlucky enough to become one, a wall where I had to watch you and Dan arguing is pretty much the last place I’d choose to perch — despite what I’m sure would be the temptation to conduct a kamikaze raid on Dan’s tonsils.

Greg Diamond

November 13, 2013 at 4:26 am

It’s interesting to note that Dan’s criticism of me is apparently based on a misunderstanding that I’d hope would be weeded out of people by the end of elementary school — that placing items A, B, and C in a category does not necessarily imply placing items X, Y, and Z in that same category. I’ve said that Tait supports what I consider to be good Democratic on the issues that have been most well-publicized in Anaheim this year. To think that I was thus asserting that he supports Democratic issues on ALL issues, one would have to be inattentive, insincere, incoherent, or insane.

(It wouldn’t surprise me, though, if had a better track record of supporting traditional Democratic positions on issues this year than did Jordan Brandman! Why Dan doesn’t criticize Brandman for cozying up to Pringle, Priest, Ament, Murray, Eastman, and Kring is fascinating to contemplate.)

While I haven’t studied those particular issues, I expect that I would disagree with Tait’s position on them. I’ve written elsewhere that I agree with Galloway more across the board than I do Tait. However, on the issues that are front and center in Anaheim right now, not only do I think that Tait’s positions are well in tune with Democratic values, but apparently so do the majority of rank-and-file Democrats in the area. (How do I know this? From talking to party officials in the area.)

Speaking of how one knows things, the research done for this piece is very atypical of Dan’s work in terms of the amount of research put in (and especially in terms of the amount of relevant knowledge that it demonstrates of Anaheim politics and policy, about which Dan generally appears to know little.) So, I’m just curious as to who did the research and fed Dan the story. I don’t expect him to say so, but it’s interesting to wonder why not.

Chris, believe me: I have no desire to be a fly at all, but if I was unlucky enough to become one, a wall where I had to watch you and Dan arguing is pretty much the last place I’d choose to perch — despite what I’m sure would be the temptation to conduct a kamikaze raid on Dan’s tonsils. And who, even a fly, would want to die that sort of death?

“So, I’m just curious as to who did the research and fed Dan the story. I don’t expect him to say so, but it’s interesting to wonder why not.”

Greg — I’ve been blogging since 2006 and have spent a considerable amount of time meeting people and making connections. it’s called “sourcing.” You should try it sometime. I also know how to file requests for documents and other forms of public information. So to suggest I don’t do adequate research or I’m “fed” stories suggests you clearly aren’t as smart as you think you are.

And believe it or not Greg, I actually spend time listening to what people have to say. Suffice to say, Tait has a long record to draw from where I’m reviewing records now. Nobody is feeding me stories but people are reacting to questions I’m asking.

Greg, its just a good thing OJ doesn’t pay you by the word. But in reading your ADD injected posts that never seem to make a point, I can understand why you have more time to devote to blogging than practicing law. I just wish your stuff was more….readable.

Dan, I think you forget, I have been watching Galloway for a long, long time, and apparently paying closer attention to her actions than you have. I didn’t want to go there, but you want to bring this stuff up, then the info is fair game.
• Galloway has “turned on a man of integrity” Jason Young,

Gee, what else is it called when you publicly rip on the guy who put his own reputation on the line for a decade defending you against your worst enemies?

• that Tait supports traditional Democratic issues (Greg Diamond),

I would argue that Tait supports what we would consider traditional “Good Government” issues, and I know Greg’s view of Democratic issues are based on his desire for “Good Government.”

• or that Galloway is too stupid to be Mayor (Cynthia Ward: “And if Galloway was so dumb as a rock that she didn’t know any better, or failed to find out if she was unfamiliar with the show, what makes her think she is smart enough to run this City?),

Dan, are you telling me her appearance on the Daily Show was the work of a genius? The role of Mayor is to be the spokesperson for Anaheim, representing us on national and sometimes international television. Watch this and tell me this is how you would allow your city to be represented, Hell Dan, you wouldn’t let one of your clients appear on a program without vetting it and prepping the person for what they should expect, Galloway just blindly marched in, cute shoes and all, and made an ass of herself, or allowed Stewart’s crew to make an ass of her. Go ahead, have you forgotten what a disaster that was? http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=88103&title=Callous-in-Wonderland

• or comments on her decorating from someone who never set foot in her Colony home during her BoS run(Dave Zenger, “I seem to remember this was shot in her second fake new home. Just check out the thrift store furniture. Even a bad house stager would be embarrassed). Note to Dave, it wasn’t cheap furniture and the home wasn’t fake, but you certainly are).

Zenger was not ripping on her décor so much as he was ripping on the carpetbagging of a woman who bounced from borrowed house to borrowed house, both owned by a known supporter with real estate to spare, in search of at least one that was zoned residential so she could legally claim to reside there. Dan, what is your definition of “home?” Did you open closets? Was there laundry in the hamper, female product in the medicine cabinet, leftovers in the fridge and not just the catered food brought in for the day? Or were you taken in by a staged home? I have friends who live there, like RIGHT THERE Dan, and other than someone coming and going every now and then during the day to lower blinds, etc. there was no sign of someone running out to get the paper in a robe at 6 am, no glow of TV late at night, no Bella barking at the mailman, no sign of life unless she was having an event for those like you who needed plausible deniability.

• what did she really do during her time on the council?
• I can keep bringing up her work on affordable housing that helps working class families in Anaheim.
• She helped create the Anaheim Family Justice Center to help curb domestic violence,
• served on the OCTA
• and has received numerous awards for public service
• So if an elected conservative Republican mayor takes credit for something they actually voted against, is that a mark of integrity?

We will come back to those….

You quote the Mayor saying, “When I took office, the city was losing $56,000 a day and had been for two years. If I didn’t do anything, we would have run out of money. We had eaten through $30 million in reserves. We had to make immediate cuts. A lot of people didn’t like that but it had to be done.”
“If ‘I’ didn’t do anything” is the key phrase here. As it turned out, Tait didn’t do anything.
From the minutes of the March 2011 meeting:
RESOLUTION NO 2011 030 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving a Letter of Understanding between the D1154 Anaheim Municipal Employees Association General and Clerical Units and the City of Anaheim Council Meeting Minutes of March 22 2011.

That’s not the budget. Indeed, the overall budget that got us in over our heads, budgets loaded with pork barrel projects for the special insiders’ groups, was approved repeatedly under Galloway’s watchful eye. I have not gone back to check her votes, I will say that I cannot recall a single time that she called attention to the insane spending habits of Pringle’s world class crony capitalism, but I know one need only to scratch the surface to see her own friends loaded up with enough goodies to get her to go along. That’s not good government, that’s not creating consensus or collaboration, that is simply being cut in on the take, after robbing taxpayers blind and putting us in the deepest hole Anaheim had been in for years.

• “Mayor Tait responded his concern was that for a two week period an employee would work for 9 days and be paid for 9-1/2days and he would not be able to support this unless it was a one for one exchange.”

For a guy who signs the fronts of paychecks, how can you not get that? He was right to oppose it, I thought it at the time and I believe it now. Would you pay your team for 9 ½ days, work them for 9, and call it a cost savings?

• “wished he could have been part of the decision making process earlier on however he would not be able to support a concession that provided an hourly rate increase. Council Member Murray remarked she had given this proposal a great deal of consideration and also would have liked to have been part of the team coming up with the terms of this negotiation”

I am not clear on how the City does their negotiations, I am only familiar with the smaller government entity where I am privy to the Closed Session process and we are all involved in negotiating MOUs from the beginning. So I am baffled as to how this gets so far without input from the Mayor and at least one Council member. Perhaps there is a committee that negotiates and then it comes back to the full Council? In which case your explanation that Galloway made the deal but Tait and Murray were out of the loop would make sense. That Galloway would offer staff more pay for less work is not a win. Tait’s reasons for rejecting what was negotiated are valid, and the fact that the same majority also unable to do the math on the Stadium, streetcar, and hotel giveaways actually approved the MOU does not make it a good deal.
To dismiss the cuts made by Tait to the overall budget for years at a stretch because he wanted MORE cuts from one component of the process is bad math, Dan.

Instead, let’s look at what your girl DID do at City Hall.
• what did she really do during her time on the council?
• I can keep bringing up her work on affordable housing that helps working class families in Anaheim.

You mean like the Elm Street Commons?

On November 28, 2006, SADI, the developer for Elm Street Commons, was scheduled for DDA approval, where the Housing Authority’s standard split is 85% to the City, and the developer keeps 15% as profit. The 85% is then recycled into more housing projects, which keeps Anaheim building apartments for the working poor. In addition, Elm Street Commons, received many millions of dollars in incentives like a sewer project and other mitigation measures on the City’s dime. Nobody took advantage of SADI development. Yet during the 11-28-06 meeting, Richard Chavez pulled the item from the Consent Calendar, and after a truly bizarre song and dance act between Galloway, Chavez, and Sidhu, the City Council changed the agreement, bumping the developer’s profit from the standard 15% to a whopping and unprecedented 50% profit! Go watch the video and tell me the fix wasn’t in from the beginning. None of the three are very good actors.
thttp://anaheim.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=72This item begins about 38 minutes into the meeting.

Mayor Curt Pringle went postal, saying, “By taking money out of that pot and not returning it to that pot it limits the amount of affordable housing we will do in the future.” The change meant that the developer would not be paying back 35% of the cost of the project to a revolving fund, and therefore that 35% would not be available for housing the working poor in the future. This is how Galloway serves the poor with affordable housing projects, by diverting the pool meant for the population of Anaheim’s workforce, and instead lining the pockets of a developer who was later investigated by the FBI. After approving the vote, Lorri admonishes the developer, “I hope you acknowledge how much Council has been supportive of you.”

Meanwhile, SADI funnels money into a shady PAC (Hometown Voter) just before the 2006 election, funding an Independent Expenditure on behalf of Richard Chavez’ failed re-election. And they certainly didn’t forget Galloway, in 2008, funneling money through PAC filings with that paragon of virtue, Treasurer Kinde Durkee, Elm Street put up $15,000 to fund the Clear Channel billboards promoting Lorri’s re-election. They also underwrote a large mailing, and the graphic arts for the mail piece.

But wait, there’s more! Jump over to the filings for Orange County Leaders for Change, where Elm Street money mixed with a donation from SunCal, again using Kinde Durkee, was spent on the campaigns of both Lorri Galloway and Diane Singer. If you recall, both Diane and Lorri backed SunCal’s development that prompted the formation of SOAR. I guess this is the “compromise” and “bridge building” Galloway wants us to understand she can bring to City Council…again. Oh and try going over there, the project is the epitome of POS construction, the Styrofoam building details are already showing through the thin stucco barely sprayed over, it is a mess and the City is now stuck with it. At the time I called it “the slum of tomorrow” and it didn’t take long for “tomorrow” to become now.

• She helped create the Anaheim Family Justice Center to help curb domestic violence.

There is no doubt that the Center does a great deal of good in the community, I understand it to have been Chief John Welter’s idea, which is why they named the Center after him when he left the Chief’s office. http://anaheimpd.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/family-justice-center-adds-john-welter-to-name/
“Officials announced at a luncheon Thursday that the Orange County Family Justice Center is adding “John Welter” to its name.
It was Welter, the Anaheim police chief who retired this year, who brought the concept of a family justice center to Orange County.”

I do know that the City had been leasing the building at a very nice, affordable rate, and then spent big bucks from that diminishing pool in order to buy the building from the developer…coincidentally the same guy who provided the “homes” for Lorri to “live in” while running for Supe. There was a lot of questioning at the time regarding the value of the building versus what was paid. You want to ask her about that or should I go dig up the paperwork?

• served on the OCTA:

Yep, she did. And the boondoggle we both agree is a complete POS was done under her watch. I have the documents, boxes and boxes of them, showing that staff kept Pringle much more up to speed on the project than they did Tait. Tait had nearly no knowledge of the project when he came on board and staff appears to have kept it that way. Many, many months went by in which he was not briefed at all, and he had no reason to believe the project was anywhere near the point it was at. Do you know who would know? The one person on Council during the Pringle years, who then served as OCTA rep under Tait’s administration. While your pal Galloway did vote against the streetcar, she brought up few relative objections other than she really, really likes MagLev. Where was her concern for the lack of public process? She was the only one who would have known the staff was flat-out freaking LYING to their own Council, and she failed to catch it and alert the Mayor that they had a problem. And at the next vote, she approved-along with Council-moving forward with the next phase of the project by giving Hill (Steve Lodge’s contract) over NINE MILLION DOLLARS to complete work that had been promised to the public in Phase one in 2008 (where your girl was there, Tait was not) and was not delivered. Never mind the many millions of Federal dollars sandwiched in the middle, approved under Galloway’s seasoned and watchful eye. Galloway was THE biggest bridge between the administration that began the project and should have known what was promised for the money, and where it ended up while she was OCTA rep, I would not call her service a resounding success. I had to do the research and bring the info to the Mayor (after the fact) that our OCTA rep should have been on top of. So should Anaheim end up with the one project you and I agree should never be built, at least one of the stations could commemorate Galloway the eagle-eyed champion of the taxpayers’ dollar.

I also see the grantee/grantor records are pretty busy lately when I run those names in more recent searches, I will be checking those shortly to see if there are sources of revenue etc that have recently come in. In short, if someone is propping up the dying charity, I am going to find it. Any bets on who might be behind her run? How did Galloway go from begging to keep the doors open, to being in a position to run for office? Has she explained that? Nobody jumps in without some promise of support, and the only visible support I see right now is Dan and John S, both men I generally admire, but neither of you is going to run an IE campaign for her from your own pockets. So who talked Lorri into this suicide mission? Who has the most to lose should she run for Council, where she had a clear shot, and even I would have left her largely alone, I would not have supported her, but I’d have left the thermonuclear war at home, and that is saying a LOT considering our history.

• So if an elected conservative Republican mayor takes credit for something they actually voted against, is that a mark of integrity?
I don’t know Dan, you tell me, because your choice for Mayor does it ALL THE TIME. Again, from her 2008 re-election campaign; materials sent from Galloway’s own campaign showed her taking credit for the following projects;
1 New Police Station

2 New Libraries

2 New Community Centers

1 New Police station has indeed been added to the streetscape. The new Police Station on Beach Blvd. held its groundbreaking on September 13, 2002. Lorri Galloway was not elected to office until November 2004. She had nothing to do with the planning or funding of the new Police Station and her only connection was in attending the Grand Opening on March 31, 2007.

1 New Library was indeed added in Anaheim while Galloway was in office. The Haskett Branch Library was demolished in September 2004, a month prior to Galloway’s election.http://www2.anaheim.net/article.cfm?id=740

Plans for the new library were underway before Lorri Galloway even filed papers to run for City Council, and the grant application shown here reveals that funding was requested in the year 2000, without involvement from Lorri Galloway.http://www.library.ca.gov/lba2000/funded/haskett.html Lorri did attend the opening. Maybe that is what she takes credit for.

And let’s not forget a Family Center that was the idea of a Police Chief, but she did get her buddy cut in on the pork so maybe that is what she means…

Dan, again I wasn’t going to go there, but if your girl wants back in the game, then game on. I had packed everything into the attic, hoping to never see it again. I have good friends who believe in her, and I don’t want to personally disillusion them, but I’m not going to let you drag down a good man of integrity in order to build up someone I have watched for a lot of years, with a very sour taste in my mouth.

Affordable Housing – Elm Street Commons
The standard Anaheim had for the residual revenue split was 85% to Anaheim and 15% to the developer. That standard was much less than used in other cities throughout Southern California, in which the norm is developers receive the 50%; referenced by the consultant for the project in the City Council meeting on 11/28/2006. While Anaheim creates more that its share of low paying jobs in the region, Galloway and Richard Chavez believed the 15% residuals split was a roadblock used by Anaheim to dissuade the development of affordable housing projects for families. In fact, at this point in Anaheim’s history, Anaheim had in total approved only one other affordable housing project approved for families. In the City Council meeting of 11/28/2006 Chavez asked for increasing the residual revenue split to 50/50 “to encourage further development” of affordable family housing, which was supported by the majority of the Council. Anaheim’s Affordable Housing Strategic Plan supported by Pringle, Galloway and Chavez in 2006 created the pathway for the standards and development of 100’s of affordable homes for families in Anaheim.

Anaheim Family Justice Center —
Chavez introduced the concept of a Family Justice Center in 2003 to the City Council in part due to the child abuse starvation death of baby Samantha Gutierrez, Chavez as a member of the City Council (council meeting minutes 9/23/03) and Galloway as an advocate lobbied State and Local officials to make a change in how child abuse cases were handled in Anaheim – there a sculpture in the lobby of the AFJC that honors Baby Samantha today. In 2004 John Welter was selected by the City Council to be Police Chief, in part because of his background in helping to develop the Justice Center of San Diego (Chavez says he asked Welter about the potential for a Family Justice Center in Anaheim when he interviewed Welter prior to getting hired). Led by Council members Chavez and Galloway, a committee was established to create a one stop center for dealing with family violence – Welter was given the charge of creating the center.

Durkee
Lorri Galloway had no personal relationship with Durkee – just about every elected Dem in OC used Durkee to handle their campaign funds (including Solorio, Correa, Sanchez, Kang and Krom), as did many I.E.s. She had no connection or control in anyway on how or who does Independent Expenditures. No candidate does.

Eli Home
There are no family members or relatives of Lorri that sit on the Board of Directors; as per Fernando Negrete – Eli Home President.

As far as yoru accusation regarding Tulleners, we’re told “A full and comprehensive audit of all financial matters regarding the Eli Home is conducted annually. The Eli Home does not respond to reckless accusations.” Fernando Negrete – Eli Home President.

Additionally, I’ve seen the utility bills from Lorri’s place at the Colony during the bid for BoS; someone certainly lived there. The bill was more than mine. Secondly, I’ve been consistent its OK for people who move (carpetbag) in order to run for higher office representing people they mostly represent in their current office. I did write a piece of Steven Choi carpetbagging and called out the fact his entire family was registered to vote from a one-bedroom condo with metal folder chairs. The difference between Sidhu’s and Galloway’s carpetbagging is that they actually lived in the homes they rented to run for office while Choi clearly did not.

I think you obsess about her cute shoes too much. I am examining Tait’s record and past actions in detail too. Preliminary results — he’s not the angel you think he is….

Daniel Lamb

November 13, 2013 at 11:35 am

Guys…

If the politics of Galloway and Tait were compared in isolation, I would not presume to tell Democrats that they should vote for a Republican. Obviously, no amount of integrity can completely reconcile left and right. But that is not the case in Anaheim right now because there is something larger at stake. I am only exaggerating a little when I say that democracy is negligible in Anaheim. I implore you to remember that labor is a meaningless concept absent democracy. I’m making the arguement that irrespective of personal politics, Galloway’s candidacy is a step in the wrong direction; it’s just math.

Cynthia Ward

November 14, 2013 at 10:42 pm

Dan, if you go back and watch what happened at the NEXT Council meeting, after Chavez got beat by Kring (I admire the way she can walk a precinct) the deal came back….and after Pringle grabbed the developer and a few council members by the scruff of the neck, miraculously SADI went ahead and built the thing for the same 50/50 split everyone else gladly worked for…indeed SADI said they were willing to work for that split at the first meeting but it would be nicer if they gave him more money, so the 3 did. Not exactly great negotiators. I never said Durkee was linked to Galloway I said she was linked to some shady people who back Galloway, interesting given Galloway’s statement to remember how good they had been to him.

And here we have kim tulleners as Program Director, I assume that is a paid staff position, I shared the grant deeds, why would the Eli Home transfer their real estate holdings to a paid staff member and her husband the Board member at the time, have them take out a mortgage claiming BOTH houses on the same day were their primary residences, suck equity out in a loan and then transfer back to the Eli Home? The grant deeds are right there, I posted them. How does one have TWO primary residences? That gets you a better interest rate, doesn’t it? What’s the name of that? begins with an F I think…

Dan Chmielewski

November 17, 2013 at 10:24 pm

Cynthia — meanwhile, the BoD of Eli Home contacted me and will be sending me a detailed rebuttal to your comments that they have asked me to publish and I will as a new post.

You have mentioned several times neighbors in Lorri’s old Colony neighborhood who insist that she never lived there. Care to pony up some names so I might contact them myself? The clown car of commenters over there is very good about demanding proof without actually ever offering anything (often times, they’re own names, but I do understand cowards love the shadows).